Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 hours ago, Smallc said:

Of course, Argus leaves out that the Liberals are shifting the total towards more economic immigrants, less he present what happened as good news in any way.

How does he "leave it out"? The details of the small increase in economic class immigrants are right there in the linked article. The increase in economic class immigrants is expected because of the expected drop in the number of refugees in 2017 relative to 2016.

  • Replies 320
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Go fetch isn't really a good debate tactic.  There was a risk of painting the Trudeau government in a lightly more positive light by mentioning the rise in economic immigrants.  When there was a much smaller increase in family class immigrants last year he mentioned it a dozen times (at least).

Posted
14 hours ago, Argus said:

Why call them young? Most immigrants appear to be middle aged. Which also has a cost in that we expect young workers to be paying into things like pensions and health care for many decades without using them (much). That doesn't work so well when you show up in your mid forties.

The median age of economic immigrants (30.3 in 2010 and 30.2 in 2011)... the median age of Canadians in general (39.9 years)
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/91-209-x/2013001/article/11787-eng.htm

 

Posted
13 hours ago, Argus said:

It would be remiss to let the announcement that the Liberals will NOT after all vastly increase immigration go by without comment. They are increasing the base level to 300k, but since Harper unilaterally increased it to 300k last year in an election year it's not really an increase.

Apparently there was opposition in cabinet to McCallum's enthusiasm for a big new increase. And to quote the Globe, despite how McCallum said everyone he met wanted more immigration there was "little enthusiasm' in polls for an increase in immigration.

Opinion polls – including in-depth polling by Mr. McCallum’s own department – consistently found little support for boosting immigration and broad support for the status quo.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/liberals-to-hold-immigration-level-steady-in-2017/article32600713/

Disappointing news.  Why bother forming an "Advisory Council on Economic Growth" then ignore their main recommendation?

Posted
12 hours ago, Smallc said:

Of course, Argus leaves out that the Liberals are shifting the total towards more economic immigrants, less he present what happened as good news in any way.

Riiiight. I forgot. After his much ballyhooed switch to allowing in more family class immigrants - before the election, in order to curry favour with ethnic groups, he's now reversing that to go back to the same way it was before. Sorry, ethnics! Suckers! Of course, the Liberals will just smile and say "We did what we told you. We just didn't say it would be like that for more than one year."

 

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
On 11/1/2016 at 11:38 PM, Bonam said:

How does he "leave it out"? The details of the small increase in economic class immigrants are right there in the linked article. The increase in economic class immigrants is expected because of the expected drop in the number of refugees in 2017 relative to 2016.

Why is it that we are told that Canada needs immigration in order to get the economy going? Yet, we keep bringing in hundreds of thousands of new immigrants every year, and yet Canada is suppose to be in an economic slump. This must show that immigration is not all that it is cracked up to be. Politicians just keep flooding the country with more new immigrants that is does not require. Canada's immigration policy is a dam fiasco which needs fixing fast. In my opinion, shut the dam gates.  

Posted
2 hours ago, taxme said:

Why is it that we are told that Canada needs immigration in order to get the economy going? 

Its been explained about a dozen times in this thread alone.

Quote

shut the dam gates. 

A terrible idea and no government will do it. 

I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger

Posted
On 11/2/2016 at 9:19 AM, Argus said:

Riiiight. I forgot. After his much ballyhooed switch to allowing in more family class immigrants - before the election, in order to curry favour with ethnic groups, he's now reversing that to go back to the same way it was before. Sorry, ethnics! Suckers! Of course, the Liberals will just smile and say "We did what we told you. We just didn't say it would be like that for more than one year."

 

LOL, you're acting like its some kind of surprise that election campaigns are designed to appeal to certain demographics and many of the promises made turn out to be hollow? 

Quick! Somebody get Argus a tissue!

I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger

Posted
1 hour ago, dre said:

LOL, you're acting like its some kind of surprise that election campaigns are designed to appeal to certain demographics and many of the promises made turn out to be hollow? 

Quick! Somebody get Argus a tissue!

First, you guys kept claiming the shiny pony was different. Second, no, I've been saying for years that our immigration system is designed to win votes for politicians, not to help Canada's economy.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
On 10/19/2016 at 7:20 PM, BC_chick said:

He's doing a Mulroney.

=====

Canada is a large country in land area. but most Canadians live near the US border.

What is "Canada"? (Imagine a condo building with a rich guy paying most of the condo fees... )

 

Posted
17 hours ago, Argus said:

First, you guys kept claiming the shiny pony was different. Second, no, I've been saying for years that our immigration system is designed to win votes for politicians, not to help Canada's economy.

"You guys" is an imaginary group of people in your head. I never said anything like that. And immigration policy is completely centered around economics, and is driven by the business and banking sectors who have commissioned numerous studies calling for increased immigration. I even explained to you WHY they want more.

The constant use of the word "Shiny Pony" is something somebody in grade 3 would do.

I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger

Posted
16 minutes ago, dre said:

"You guys" is an imaginary group of people in your head. I never said anything like that. And immigration policy is completely centered around economics, and is driven by the business and banking sectors who have commissioned numerous studies calling for increased immigration. I even explained to you WHY they want more.

The constant use of the word "Shiny Pony" is something somebody in grade 3 would do.

Maybe I'm trying to keep the discussion at a level you'll understand.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted
10 hours ago, August1991 said:

 

What is "Canada"? (Imagine a condo building with a rich guy paying most of the condo fees... )

 

 

Sure.. What you failed to mention is that that guy has 6 floors to himself all decked out in luxurious trappings.... And everyone else lives in the basement with bare concrete walls, in 10x10 apartments. That's how wealth is distributed in Canada.

I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Argus said:

Maybe I'm trying to keep the discussion at a level you'll understand.

Or maybe blind partisanship and ideology has severely handicapped your mental capacity! :)

Edited by dre

I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger

Posted
36 minutes ago, dre said:

 

Sure.. What you failed to mention is that that guy has 6 floors to himself all decked out in luxurious trappings.... And everyone else lives in the basement with bare concrete walls, in 10x10 apartments. That's how wealth is distributed in Canada.

Except not. And in any case the immigration you crave for only helps to further concentrate wealth. 

Posted
22 hours ago, Argus said:

I've been saying for years that our immigration system is designed to win votes for politicians, not to help Canada's economy.

 

I think the problem is our politicians think that the economy is all about infinite growth. We need to start thinking about the economy as long term stability. Immigration is simply a short cut to pseudo growth.

Posted
On 11/3/2016 at 2:35 PM, dre said:

Its been explained about a dozen times in this thread alone.

A terrible idea and no government will do it. 

It was mentioned and explained in the news that Canada's economy is in a slump. Yet we are told that more immigration will be good for Canada. So, why the slump? Why do you keep believing that immigration is great for Canada when it has shown that it is not? Stop believing these immigration groups and special interest groups and corporations that just want to flood Canada with more immigrants from the third world so they can pay cheap wages and destroy unions. More immigration is a terribly bad idea for Canada and cannot change until Canadians say enough already, and demand that their phony and fake political leaders put in place a moratorium on immigration. Either you are a Canadian first or you are not. Stop listening to the globalist elite zionist liars. They are not good for anyone's health.    

Posted
On ‎11‎/‎4‎/‎2016 at 2:52 PM, dre said:

Or maybe blind partisanship and ideology has severely handicapped your mental capacity! :)

How do other nations mange economic growth such Japan, who happens to have a very restrictive immigration policies, how does one of the largest world economies mange it all without bringing in large numbers of immigrants.....or are you suggesting that there are no exceptions to the rules..... 

We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.

Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, Smallc said:

Japan is a pretty bad example of managing economic growth.

So what your saying is Japan has never been an example to follow....or that they have no economic growth...But they do have a restrictive immigration policy......along with many other countries that follow the same policies........MY question is this how do they continue their economic growth dispite claims here that say......to have any growth one must have a robust immigration policy.....no immigration no growth.....That is what you guys a saying.....and i'm saying that is not true in all cases.....

Edited by Army Guy

We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.

Posted

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/japan/gdp-growth

And yet according to this site, Japan is doing better than Canada when it comes to growth, and yet they have a restrictive immigration policy......how do you explain that....

We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.

Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Smallc said:

Looks pretty comparable to me, with Japan doing slightly better much of the time.

gdp-growth-annual

Canada did it with one of the highest (per capita) rates of immigration of any country in the world and Japan with one of the lowest. Immigration and population growth is not necessary for economic growth. 

Edited by Bonam

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,907
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    derek848
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • stindles earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • stindles earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Doowangle earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Doowangle earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Barquentine went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...